RAJENDRA LAXMAN JADHAV,PUNE V. CIT(A) , PUNE

ITA 1069/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Rajendra Laxman Jadhav, the proprietor of M/s. Shree Ganesh Enterprises, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an assessment order passed under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention in the appeal was the non-appearance of the assessee during various hearings, which led to a best judgment assessment by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's participation at multiple stages and the lack of submission of relevant documents or details to substantiate his income and transactions, which included significant cash deposits and income from commissions and brokerage.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398153 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILESH SRIVASTVA
• Keywords: Additional evidence; TDS

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1069/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Rajendra Laxman Jadhav, Proprietor of M/s. Shree Ganesh Enterprises, Bacche Patil Colony, Rajgurunagar, Khed, Pune 410505 Maharashtra PAN : AOBPJ8368P Vs. Assessing Officer, Income Tax Department, Range Code 59, Ward-8(3), Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan Building,Dr. Ambedkar Marg, Near Akurdi Railway Station, Pradhikaran, Pune – 411 044 Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 07.02.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 19.01.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’). 2. When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. We however on perusal of the impugned order find that against the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before ld.CIT(A) there was no further appearance of the assessee on various dates of hearing. It is also observed that before the Assessing Officer also assessee failed to appear resulting into best judgment assessment u/s.144 Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date of hearing : 04.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 05.06.2025 ITA No.1069/PUN/2025 Rajendra Laxman Jadhav 2 of the Act. We therefore proceed to adjudicate this appeal of the assessee with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative who also stated that the issues needs to be restored to the file of lower authorities for necessary adjudication. 3. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee who is an individual and did not file return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. On the basis of the information about the cash deposit in the bank accounts of the assessee held with State Bank of India and Central Bank of India amounting to Rs.1,50,41,120/- and Rs.50,37,400/- along with TDS statement showing Commission or brokerage income of Rs.9,82,152/- and interest income of Rs.11,755/- ld. AO in order to examine all these transactions initiated assessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act by issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act. Assessee failed to appear before the AO during the re-assessment proceedings which resulted into the conclusion of the assessment at income of Rs.52,27,583/- wherein ld. AO made various additions mainly estimation of income from alleged cash deposits, interest income and commission and brokerage income. In the appeal preferred by the assessee before ld.CIT(A), assessee again failed to make proper compliance. In the statement of facts filed before this Tribunal, assessee has stated that he is a dealer of the Idea Cellular Ltd. Customers service and deals in prepaid Sim cards, prepaid vouchers, V-top up etc., and has to make advance payment to the company towards the value of the Airtime purchase. TDS statement also asserts this fact. However, it is surprising that inspite of the assessee possessing relevant details he has not filed those details before ld.CIT(A) in support of its grounds of appeal. Considering the present facts and ITA No.1069/PUN/2025 Rajendra Laxman Jadhav 3 circumstance of the case and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it proper to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to appear before ld.CIT(A) to file the documents/additional evidences. Ld. CIT(A) shall call for a remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after obtaining the objections of the assessee shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Needless to say that assessee shall be afforded due opportunity of hearing. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 05th day of June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 05th June, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "